The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Service quality models: a review
Abstract
Purpose: The main objective of this paper is to critically appraise various service quality models and identify issues for future research based on the critical analysis of literature. Design/methodology/approach: The paper critically examines 19 different service quality models reported in the literature. The critical review of the different service quality models is intended to derive linkage between them, and highlight the area for further research. Findings: The review of various service quality model revealed that the service quality outcome and measurement is dependent on type of service setting, situation, time, need etc factors. In addition to this even the customer's expectations towards particular services are also changing with respect to factors like time, increase in the number of encounters with a particular service, competitive environment, etc. This paper provides a rich agenda for future research in the subject. Research limitations/implications: This research developed a linkage between the different service quality models. Practical implications: The growth of literature in the field of service quality seems to have developed sequentially, providing a continuous updating and learning from the findings/observations of predecessors. This paper provides new directions to service quality researchers. Originality/value: This paper explores new directions in service quality research and offers practical help to researchers and practitioners in providing a direction for service quality improvement.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
SERVQUAL: A multiple-Item Scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1988) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14579729 · Cited by 21,118
The relationships of customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, and profitability: an empirical study
Hallowell, R. (1996) · International Journal of Service Industry Management · doi:10.1108/09564239610129931 · Cited by 1,862
Cited by
Impact of service quality on customer satisfaction in Malaysia airlines: A PLS-SEM approach
Farooq, M. S., Salam, M., Fayolle, A., Jaafar, N., & Ayupp, K. (2018) · Journal of Air Transport Management · doi:10.1016/j.jairtraman.2017.12.008 · Cited by 406
What accounts for students' loyalty? Some field study evidence
Helgesen, Ø., & Nesset, E. (2007) · International Journal of Educational Management · doi:10.1108/09513540710729926 · Cited by 372
Ali, F., Zhou, Y., Hussain, K., Nair, P. K., & Ragavan, N. A. (2016) · Quality Assurance in Education · doi:10.1108/qae-02-2014-0008 · Cited by 355
The Impact of Service Quality on Customer Loyalty: A Study of Banks in Penang, Malaysia
Kheng, L. L., Mahamad, O., Ramayah, T., & Mosahab, R. (2010) · International Journal of Marketing Studies · doi:10.5539/ijms.v2n2p57 · Cited by 347
Helgesen, Ø., & Nesset, E. (2007) · Corporate Reputation Review · doi:10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550037 · Cited by 344
Metadata
- Authors
- Seth, N., Deshmukh, S. G., & Vrat, P.
- Venue
- International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2005-12-01
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 913-949
- ISSN
- 0265-671X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2014672052
- Cited by
- 1,002
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 29.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Service quality models: a review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/02656710510625211
- The paper
- Seth, N., Deshmukh, S. G., & Vrat, P. (2005). Service quality models: a review. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656710510625211
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.